Bill would let farmers separate marginal land from Chapter 61A to host renewable energy without municipal right of first refusal

Representative (bill sponsor) urged the Joint Committee on Revenue to support a bill that would let farmers separate land from Chapter 61A to develop renewable energy on nonproductive, adjacent parcels.

The proposal, testimony and industry witnesses said, would remove a municipal right of first refusal prior to separation and eliminate the five‑year rollback or conveyance tax so farmers could lease adjacent land for smaller solar or other renewable projects without triggering forced sales or steep tax penalties.

The bill’s backers framed the measure as a targeted tool to help small and mid‑size farmers, notably cranberry growers, secure a supplemental income stream while keeping the core agricultural operation intact. “Putting renewable energy on, farm properties is a really important tool for farmers to be able to maintain control on their land and keep their land and keep it in farming operations,” Kate Daniel, Northeast regional director of the Coalition for Community Solar Access, told the committee.

Supporters said the language reflects recommendations from the Massachusetts Cranberry Revitalization Task Force and is intended for accessory land — marginal acreage not used for crop production — rather than active farmland. “We’re not talking a 40‑acre swath here. We’re talking something that’s gonna supplement their farm,” one speaker said, describing the proposal as a “farm first” approach where the solar component is secondary and supplemental.

Testimony described typical commercial solar lease terms and constraints that make the size of arrays site‑specific: developers seek parcels large enough to be economically viable, while farmers want to avoid converting the primary income source from farming to energy production. A committee member pressed speakers about where responsibility would lie if a separated parcel later ceased to host energy infrastructure; a witness said the municipal right of first refusal could be triggered if the parcel changes use or is sold in the future.

Advocates also said separated land would become subject to real estate and personal property taxes on the solar array, generating new municipal revenue. They noted an identical bill was reported favorably by the Joint Committee on Revenue in the prior session.

Committee members asked about appropriate size limits, environmental and wildlife review, lease terms and the views of other agricultural sectors. Witnesses said the bill cites renewable energy more broadly — not only solar — and that cranberry bog geography often leaves adjacent, cleared land better suited to arrays without tree clearing. They said typical commercial solar leases run about 20 years with two five‑year extension options, and that community solar projects may provide local bill credits or export electrons to the grid.

Supporters asked the committee to balance developer economics with protections that keep farming as the parcel’s primary use, and to clarify safeguards for towns if a parcel later converts to another use. No formal votes were recorded at the hearing.

The bill will now remain before the Joint Committee on Revenue as supporters continue outreach with other agricultural stakeholders including the Massachusetts Farm Bureau and local farmland trusts.